<p>^ Nope…undergrad is a part of my ranking though.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Come on, Hawkette! U Oregon = U Washington? U Michigan = U Wisconsin = U Illinois?</p>
<p>xiggi,
I edited my earlier post as I forgot USC and, as you pointed out, listed U Washington twice. Here is the corrected version:</p>
<p>Stanford
Northwestern</p>
<p>UC Berkeley = Southern Cal
UCLA = U Michigan = U Wisconsin = U Illinois
U Washington = Penn State
Ohio State
Purdue = U Minnesota
Indiana U = Michigan State = U Iowa = U Colorado
U Nebraska = U Arizona = U Utah
U Oregon
Arizona State = Oregon State = Washington State </p>
<p>As for your question on U Michigan = U Wisconsin = U Illinois, absolutely. </p>
<p>I have spent a lot of time over the past few years looking at each of these schools and I conclude that the differences for undergrad are razor-thin. Nod to U Michigan for grad school, but for undergrad, I think that the student bodies are essentially the same. Same with the size of the classroom and the quality of the instruction that is delivered in the classroom. </p>
<p>U Michigan wealthiest, but as indicated by their financial aid approach, I doubt their conviction to spend to help undergrads. All are under financial pressure, but state of Michigan has the most dismal economy and the university has the least room to increase tuition to make up for any future cuts in state funding. Frankly, I think that U Wisconsin has the potential to separate itself from the others as IMO it is an undervalue and underappreciated school.</p>
<p>I am laughing thinking how a University of Chicago Football team would look in the Big House in Ann Arbor or the Horsehoe in Columbus.</p>
<p>Stanford (4.9)
Cal (4.7), Chicago (4.6)
Michigan (4.4), Northwestern (4.3
UCLA (4.2), Wisconsin (4.1)
UIUC (4.0), USC (3.9)
Penn State (3.8), Washington (3.8)
Indiana (3.6), Minnesota (3.6), OSU (3.6), Purdue (3.7)
Arizona (3.5), Colorado (3.5), Iowa (3.5), Michigan State (3.4)
Arizona State (3.2), Nebraska (3.1), Oregon (3.2)
Oregon State (2.9), Utah (3.0), Washington State (3.0)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If it were important to them, Chicago could over a period of time build a competitive team. As far as I know, they are not bound by the Ivy League rules. People probably used to laugh at Stanford also. Smaller and academically strong schools can compete.</p>
<p>In the collision of ranking in academia and performance in the classroom, there are some major differences involving how these schools treat their student athletes. </p>
<p>Which schools are truest in their execution of admitting and educating quality young people and how does this compare with their regard within academia? </p>
<p>Here is a multi-year (4 years of data from 2005-2009) comparison of how effectively the football student athletes of these schools progress toward their diplomas:</p>
<p>986 Northwestern = U Illinois
976 Stanford
975 Ohio State
974 Penn State
969 UC Berkeley = Indiana U
968 U Wisconsin
965 U Southern Cal
953 UCLA
950 U Nebraska
949 U Utah
948 U Washington
947 Oregon State
945 U Iowa = Arizona State
942 U Oregon
941 Michigan State
940 U Arizona
936 U Michigan
934 U Minnesota
930 Purdue
920 U Colorado
918 Washington State</p>
<p>[Scout.com:</a> How Smart Is Your Program? - The APR Reports](<a href=“http://cfn.scout.com/2/976954.html]Scout.com:”>http://cfn.scout.com/2/976954.html)</p>
<p>and regard within academia as posted by Alex:</p>
<p>4.9 Stanford
4.6 Cal
4.3-4.4 Michigan = Northwestern
4.1-4.2 UCLA = Wisconsin
3.9-4.0 UIUC = USC
3.8 Penn State = Washington
3.6 Indiana = Minnesota = OSU = Purdue
3.4-3.5 Arizona = Colorado = Iowa = Michigan State
3.1-3.2 Arizona State = Nebraska = Oregon
2.9-3.0 Oregon State = Utah = Washington State</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Perhaps the PA changed during the night … or Chicago cashed its share of the Big 10 moolah. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>PS I know that you added the PA for the lower ranked school, but does this follow the rankings of the USNews and the admission data I posted last night. </p>
<p>No matter how many times once tries, it will NOT be possible to find any metric that places the Big Ten top school at the same level as the combination of Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA, and Washington. Not in groups, not in pairs! What happened to your play with FIVE schools? Is it because that did not work out well, that shaking the bottom of the barrel for more data becomes the new mantra?</p>
<p>“If it were important to them, Chicago could over a period of time build a competitive team. As far as I know, they are not bound by the Ivy League rules. People probably used to laugh at Stanford also. Smaller and academically strong schools can compete.”</p>
<p>I hear Delaney is talking to Robert Zimmer about Chicago resuming its athletic participation in the conference! ;)</p>
<p>Seriously, it would be awesome if they did.</p>
<p>You need to learn to chill xiggi, it is possible for both of us to be right. Stanford is above all Big 10 and Pac 10 schools. The rest of the top schools in both conferences are pretty even, with the edge going to neither conference. I have never claimed that the Big 10 was better.</p>
<p>Not sure who Xiggi is is arguing with. Most would give the PAC an advantage at the top and the Big Ten an advantage in the lower half. So top to bottom I think it’s small edge B10 ignoring U Chicago.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am only arguing when people misread or misinterpret data. There is no doubt about a few facts:</p>
<ol>
<li>At the top, the PAC 10 is substantially better academically on ALL accounts, including the otherwise misleading PA. </li>
<li>At the bottom, the Big 10 is slightly more competitive.</li>
<li>Overall, when lookingf at the 10 or 11 schools, the Big 10 is LESS selective than the PAC 10. If you need a definition of selectivity, the USNews will do just fine. </li>
<li>Chicago is not a bona fide member of the Big 10 conference, and has not been since 1946.<br></li>
</ol>
<p>Other than that, I agree with you! :)</p>
<p>I just want to chime in and support Nebraska. I love that school, I would totally apply and attend even though people doesn’t think highly of it in terms of its academics.</p>
<p>Selectivity alone is a very dubious measurement of quality–especially when dealing with state universities that may actually value access to some degree as in give as many people a chance to try and flunkout those who are not willing to work hard. The midwest tends to have this value set more than other areas. By most other measures the Oregon schools and WSU are well below the lowest of the B10. The Arizona schools might be right around the lowest in the B10. These are prior to the current changes pending.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Considering that fully half the current Pac 10 (Arizona #102, Washington State #106, Oregon #115, Arizona State #121, Oregon State Tier 3) fall well below the bottom-ranked schools in the Big Ten (Indiana, Michigan State, and Iowa, tied at #71) in both overall US News rankings and middle 50% SAT/ACT scores, to say “the Big Ten is slightly more competitive” at the bottom is a gross understatement. </p>
<p>Face it, the Pac 10 is just flat-out academically weak in its bottom half. Its five weakest members don’t even make it into the top 50 publics. Every public in the Big ten is in the nation’s top 30 publics, according to US News. That’s not a trivial difference.</p>
<p>
One = many?
No. U Arizona is in the top 30 for arts, social sciences, biological sciences, and physical sciences in the NRC rankings - 4 of the 5 broad categories. I believe the more recent USNews departmental rankings show similar results. I like WSU, but Arizona is simply superior in any objective classification.
Hawkette…</p>
<p>
SAT Math 75 %ile</p>
<p>Stanford
Northwestern
USC = UCB = UIUC
UMich
UCLA
UMN = Wisconsin
Udub = tOSU = Iowa
UNL = PSU
Purdue = MSU
CU
Indiana
Utah
WSU = UA
ASU = Oregon State = UO
% Full-time undergrads receiving Pell Grants</p>
<p>UCB
UCLA
Oregon State
ASU
UA = MSU = UMN = Udub
UNL
tOSU = UO
UIUC = Purdue = WSU
Iowa
Indiana = USC = PSU
Utah = Stanford
UMich = CU
Wisconsin
Northwestern
Admissions yield, %</p>
<p>Stanford
UNL
tOSU
UMich = Udub
UIUC
Oregon State = Wisconsin
WSU = MSU = UCB
Utah
UCLA
ASU
UO
UA = USC
Northwestern = Indiana
Iowa = UMN
PSU = CU = Purdue
Any other data you’d like to see?</p>
<p>noimag,
I don’t really care that much about this conference battle. Both are good and have their share of strong colleges. As for the proper order, I’ll happily accept your selectivity rankings as close enough for me. </p>
<p>MINE </p>
<p>Stanford
Northwestern</p>
<p>UC Berkeley = Southern Cal
UCLA = U Michigan = U Wisconsin = U Illinois
U Washington = Penn State
Ohio State
Purdue = U Minnesota
Indiana U = Michigan State = U Iowa = U Colorado
U Nebraska = U Arizona = U Utah
U Oregon
Arizona State = Oregon State = Washington State</p>
<p>YOURS</p>
<p>Stanford
Northwestern
USC = UC Berkeley = UIUC
U Michigan
UCLA
U Minnesota = U Wisconsin
U Washington = Ohio State = U Iowa
U Nebraska = Penn State
Purdue = Michigan State
U Colorado
Indiana U
U Utah
Washington State = U Arizona
Arizona State = Oregon State = U Oregon</p>
<p>While I don’t agree that selectivity is the best way to evaluate school quality, I can live with that result for today :)</p>
<p>I fail to see how the Pac-10 can even hold a candle to the Big Ten academically without something like the Committee on Institutional Cooperation. Its great and all that Stanford is by far the best school out of either conference, but it means nothing about the overall academic strength of the conference if there’s no connection between the schools’ academics.</p>
<p>When schools are tempted by the academic strength of the Big Ten, they’re not saying “Oh man! I want to be associated with Michigan for sports because their academics are great!” They’re attracted by the academic resources they receive from the conference. Maybe I’m wrong and the Pac-10 has this–but I haven’t seen anything on the level of the CIC from the Pac-10.</p>
<p>Also, xiggi, I don’t know why you’re whining about UChicago being included. If you’re discussing the Conference’s academic strength, UChicago is a member. It would make no sense to exclude Notre Dame from a discussion about the strength of Big East Basketball because they don’t play all sports there, and it would make no sense to exclude an academic member of the Big Ten in a discussion about academic strength.</p>
<p>
Hawkette, FYI, Cal’s PA score is 4.7. I demand that you apologize for this injustice! ;)</p>